Hello, everyone.
This is Enta.
Measuring Spray Thickness as Part of Quality Control
How is this measured?
Did you know that there are actually quite a few regional differences?
Basically, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism makes them 20 cm square, measures at each corner, and calculates the average of the four measurements, right?
However, even within the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, there are cases where a single measurement of 10 cm at the center is sufficient, and others where an average of four measurements at 10 cm is required.
In addition, there are some sites where no inspection holes are provided, and 20-cm anchors (φ16 × 200) are installed, with the remaining length from the top of the anchor used for management.
For the simplest areas, drill a circular hole a few centimeters in diameter, insert a scale, align it with the pin pole, and take the measurement.
There are all kinds of methods used across the country, so it’s rare that something is outright “no-go,” but it seems like inspectors all over the country just think, “This is a no-go!” lol
Some people are so set in their ways that they insist, “This is the only way to manage this!”
In that case, you should have mentioned that before the exam and given instructions accordingly.
I actually used to complain to the inspectors about that all the time back in the day, lol.
It's so unreasonable it makes me so mad lol
What's more, the local government had previously carried out construction work on a site within the same jurisdiction in that area and managed it at that time in accordance with the inspection findings.
When they said that this method was hard to understand, I ended up saying, “No, no—the inspector from the government office told me to do it this way.”
The vibe was so awkward back then lol
Well, it seems the alumni member who was there at the time put it nicely, but I don't think I was wrong.
I’m sure you’ve had experiences where even with this type of finished product inspection, you’ve been sent back and forth by the inspector.
Looking back now, I realize that since this ultimately comes down to the inspector’s subjective judgment and the site supervisor’s subjective judgment—and there’s no single correct answer—their views will probably never align.
Every now and then, when it happens to match up, people say, “This document is great!” (That was in the past), but in reality, it didn’t happen that often. (Even if my score is good, people say that about everything, lol.)
It would be great if they could standardize these kinds of inspection methods instead of using their own unique ones, but when companies go through trial and error over scoring, it just ends up creating yet another management method, doesn't it? lol
Construction management is like a quicksand trap—the more you compete with other companies, the more you have to manage this and that, the more management tasks pile up, and eventually you can’t even go home.
I think it would be even better if they focused on keeping the system simple and easy to understand by deducting points only when absolutely necessary.
See you later.
